Imagine using this stuff

Lmao no

I am all in favor for spreading donations across many - especially smaller - projects. I think that there are two levels to donations:

• The monetary one. Donating helps fund development either by paying for a full-time dev or by helping the dev stay financially stable to do a bit less work hours so they have time for the project.
• The psychological one. Most people that publish their code online are not expecting this to become big. And when a stranger from the internet appreciates their code enough for a donation this is a huge motivational factor.

I even tend to think that donating 5€ more to GIMP is less valuable than giving the money to some random project.

Interesting read!

Thank you for putting in this amount of effort highlighting some shortcomings of the Fediverse

I disagree with the other poster. Work isn’t (shouldn’t be) a place that is disjoint from the rest of our time. Making such an effort can be worth :)

I hope that you will never publish a book.

No matter how you extract the code, this will be hacky. The problem with this approach is that you are entirely dependent on the YouTube backend. They will not notify you when they change their code/API. They will not comment their code.

In the past, this has led to a considerable development investment of projects like NewPipe where they have to fix somethong every few months as there is a backend change.

I am still thinking about your problem, but I am unsure whether the approach of extracting from JS works (mid term).

Why not do the steps you outlined above as a macro on your keyboard? This eliminates the need for JS. To extract the video URL, you could use some RegEx automatically or Ctrl+F. Just some thoughts. I am still invested into this weird request :)

I have a lot of university stuff going on but I will try in the next week or so. If I don’t respond, DM me.

Thank you for the reply! I did not want to be mean, rather explain why many people would downvote this post. Welcome to Lemmy!

I am not a fan of at best non-descriptive, at worst clickbait titles with one-sentence post bodies.

• No (scientific) sources, just advertisements for an Instagram account.
• No info on underlaying map data (OSM? …)
• What even is “Low/Medium/High Risk” in numbers? The lack of quantification is meh.

No uBO? No Adblocker at all?

Search for webcompat

Thank you for providing the technical answer here, as well as the warning.

But Android has far more users than FF.

WOW YOU ARE SUCH A NICE PERSON

a) Your license footer is really cool! I will start including it as well.

b) Aren’t quotes a bit problematic, as you include them in your work? This one is probably fine, as you (quite artistically) paraphrased it but direct quotes would be a problem, right?

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Unironically thank you for licensing your comments! :)

“cabbage_colonialist”